Suspended from MADB for first time! Thread deleted! LOL!

[_RockSlider]

Well, I've certainly not detected any changes in doctrine.

But I have noticed that antiMormons and exMormons tend to have trouble dealing with societal changes and those that change with them. They suffer from a severe form of presentism which makes swimming in normal society difficult for them.

For example and as an analog, it was not too long ago that corporal punishment and the law of the school yard was considered a reasonable environment for school children.

Having been an ordinance worker for 8 years in the Provo and Timpanogos temples , I strongly disagree with you here.
Ordinances have changed, with the latest butcher of the initiatory likely being the worst offense. Argue all you want I will not buy some stupid argument about presentism ... I can't wait till you move to sprinkling and tell me the same lame argument

[_Markk]

Has the church changed how it preceives the Christian Pastor? I honestly don't know other than Internet Mormons seem to treat them better than they were back in the 60's and 70's

Has JS-H 1:19 been removed from the scriptures? Of course your very words betray the fact that you likely don't understand this representation or that you represent it differently on purpose to smear the Church.

I was hoping you could communicate a little here BC. My question was in context of how Internet Mormons treat the pastor today compared to how they were treated back when I was a member. It really has nothing to do with LDS scriptures, but how Internet Mormons perceive them.

Mark

[_harmony]

Having been an ordinance worker for 8 years in the Provo and Timpanogos temples , I strongly disagree with you here.
Ordinances have changed, with the latest butcher of the initiatory likely being the worst offense. Argue all you want I will not buy some stupid argument about presentism ... I can't wait till you move to sprinkling and tell me the same lame argument

It's about personal space, Rock.

[_MsJack]

Mormon "doctrine" doesn't change because there is no such thing as Mormon doctrine. It is a mythical creature, kind of like pink unicorns and equal partnerships where one partner presides.

Don't agree with me? Too bad. Blake Ostler does.

Mormon beliefs and practices have changed. The things that have been taught and emphasized by top church leaders have changed. That is all that matters to me.

[_Ray A]

...to smear the Church.

But you constantly smear its leaders. As far as you're concerned, any Mormon leader who is a Democrat is also an apostate. Or do you draw some kind of cog.diss. Disneyland division here?

You either support or reject your leaders. Or do you go around saying, "I only support Republican Church leaders"?

[_Polygamy-Porter]

Having been an ordinance worker for 8 years in the Provo and Timpanogos temples , I strongly disagree with you here.
Ordinances have changed, with the latest butcher of the initiatory likely being the worst offense. Argue all you want I will not buy some stupid argument about presentism ... I can't wait till you move to sprinkling and tell me the same lame argument

It's about personal space, Rock.

Just look at the origins of the temple ceremony and it is easy to dismiss them as sacred or special.

I felt like I was a pseudo mason after I knew the truth about the origins.

Everyone here knows my new name...

[_RockSlider]

Having been an ordinance worker for 8 years in the Provo and Timpanogos temples , I strongly disagree with you here.
Ordinances have changed, with the latest butcher of the initiatory likely being the worst offense. Argue all you want I will not buy some stupid argument about presentism ... I can't wait till you move to sprinkling and tell me the same lame argument

It's about personal space, Rock.

It's about everlasting ordinances, the same, past, present, future that are changed by whims/comfort of the member. Why was this not an issue for a hundred years preceding this, oh yea "presentionism" i.e. close to humanism only it starts with a P.

And those pesky penalties ... personal space? Naa, just offensive, of course one of the more beautiful things/concepts was also personal space ... 5 points of fellowship - out of there.

If personal space is more important than the ordinances of salvation then the ordinances must be useless, it must be a farce, these cannot change and it still be true.

edit ... at least that is what I was taught all my life.

[_harmony]

It's about everlasting ordinances, the same, past, present, future that are changed by whims/comfort of the member. Why was this not an issue for a hundred years preceding this, oh yea "presentionism" i.e. close to humanism only it starts with a P.

And those pesky penalties ... personal space? Naa, just offensive, of course one of the more beautiful things/concepts was also personal space ... 5 points of fellowship - out of there.

If personal space is more important than the ordinances of salvation then the ordinances must be useless, it must be a farce, these cannot change and it still be true.

edit ... at least that is what I was taught all my life.

Um... no. It's about personal space. People don't like having their personal space invaded nowadays. So they neglected the temples. So the leaders changed things a bit, so people would pay tithing/go through TRI/attend temple. And supposedly it worked... sorta.

[_RockSlider]

Um... no. It's about personal space. People don't like having their personal space invaded nowadays. So they neglected the temples. So the leaders changed things a bit, so people would pay tithing/go through TRI/attend temple. And supposedly it worked... sorta.

Sorry I got all pissy

[_harmony]

Um... no. It's about personal space. People don't like having their personal space invaded nowadays. So they neglected the temples. So the leaders changed things a bit, so people would pay tithing/go through TRI/attend temple. And supposedly it worked... sorta.

Sorry I got all pissy

No problem. That's what started my day today... a man getting all pissy.